[Rumour] Dowbiggin is reporting a new head of hockey ops

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by BigFlameDog

I'm no expert but I'm pretty sure a trend has to consist of a larger sample size than once in a row.......

Twice in a row, actually. It was widely believed at the time that Darryl Sutter was hired as coach with the expectation that he would soon replace Craig Button as GM. A reasonable belief: after the fiasco with Gilbert and Savard, Button was on thin ice, and Sutter was standing on the shore holding an axe.

[BigFlameDog]

That's still two totally different things...you guys get that right?

There is no trend here.

I do completely agree that everyone with an ounce of brains saw the writing on the wall in the Feaster signing.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Twice in a row, actually. It was widely believed at the time that Darryl Sutter was hired as coach with the expectation that he would soon replace Craig Button as GM. A reasonable belief: after the fiasco with Gilbert and Savard, Button was on thin ice, and Sutter was standing on the shore holding an axe.

I think you need a data set larger than two to establish a trend. Two instances can be considered coincidental. Third instance in the data is considered a trend.

[bucksmasher]

Originally Posted by BigFlameDog

I'm no expert but I'm pretty sure a trend has to consist of a larger sample size than once in a row.......

True enough, I just thought that idea would be crossing feasters mind in the wee hours on a restless night.

[bucksmasher]

Originally Posted by New Era

I think you need a data set larger than two to establish a trend. Two instances can be considered coincidental. Third instance in the data is considered a trend.

ahh come on, ya know its going to happen

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by New Era

I think you need a data set larger than two to establish a trend. Two instances can be considered coincidental. Third instance in the data is considered a trend.

Depends on the nature of the incident. We're not talking about unrelated events being plotted on a graph. We're talking about the same owners, the same president, making the same pattern of decisions twice. That's much too strong a connection to put down to coincidence.

Add in the previous history with Risebrough and Coates. It really does seem to be SOP for the Flames to hire their new GM before firing the old one. Not the best way to do it — the best candidates will want to be hired *as* GM, not as #1 on the waiting list — but it does seem to be the way they've chosen.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Depends on the nature of the incident. We're not talking about unrelated events being plotted on a graph. We're talking about the same owners, the same president, making the same pattern of decisions twice. That's much too strong a connection to put down to coincidence.

Add in the previous history with Risebrough and Coates. It really does seem to be SOP for the Flames to hire their new GM before firing the old one. Not the best way to do it — the best candidates will want to be hired *as* GM, not as #1 on the waiting list — but it does seem to be the way they've chosen.

You've just expanded your data set to disprove potential coincidence. Forget it, you don't seem to understand what you're talking about. Carry on.

[browna]

Ok, let the new season begin...welcome to Calgary Mr. Shanahan?

[PeteLFan]

Originally Posted by browna

Ok, let the new season begin...welcome to Calgary Mr. Shanahan?

On Thursday June 27th there was a incident. Brendan shanahan came through the Calgary international and was named president.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by New Era

You've just expanded your data set to disprove potential coincidence. Forget it, you don't seem to understand what you're talking about. Carry on.

I'm not talking about statistics here. In fact, talking about this statistically is entirely invalid, because there are not enough items in the entire population (let alone any sample) to be amenable to statistical analysis. Therefore we employ other methods.

The only person in this conversation who doesn't know what he's talking about is the pedant who considers it improper to use the word 'trend' except in its technical sense. That ain't me, bub.

[sun]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Twice in a row, actually. It was widely believed at the time that Darryl Sutter was hired as coach with the expectation that he would soon replace Craig Button as GM. A reasonable belief: after the fiasco with Gilbert and Savard, Button was on thin ice, and Sutter was standing on the shore holding an axe.

Originally Posted by New Era

I think you need a data set larger than two to establish a trend. Two instances can be considered coincidental. Third instance in the data is considered a trend.

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Depends on the nature of the incident. We're not talking about unrelated events being plotted on a graph. We're talking about the same owners, the same president, making the same pattern of decisions twice. That's much too strong a connection to put down to coincidence.

Add in the previous history with Risebrough and Coates. It really does seem to be SOP for the Flames to hire their new GM before firing the old one. Not the best way to do it — the best candidates will want to be hired *as* GM, not as #1 on the waiting list — but it does seem to be the way they've chosen.

Originally Posted by New Era

You've just expanded your data set to disprove potential coincidence. Forget it, you don't seem to understand what you're talking about. Carry on.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Nvm

[edslunch]

So when is this going to happen?

[keenan87]

Originally Posted by edslunch

So when is this going to happen?

Today at about 11:23

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by keenan87

Today at about 11:23

Link?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by keenan87

Today at about 11:23

Originally Posted by Roof-Daddy

Link?

...or just being a smartass?

[Roof-Daddy]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

...or just being a smartass?

Most likely.

[jayswin]

I just can't believe someone used the term "bub" to insult someone. Hey, the '80's called...

[IgiTang]

Get this thread back on track please, not only did you guys waste my data, my limited brain capacity is aldo very valuble.

Lets get back to the orginal topc and start getting excited for a new era. Please.

[BigFlameDog]

I am backing away from the serious train.....sorry Igi.